Pope offers to mediate between world leaders to end wars
Pope Leo XIV on Wednesday offered to mediate between leaders of countries at war, saying that he himself "will make every effort so that this peace may prevail".
The new US pontiff, who became head of the world's 1.4 billion Catholics last week, also called on Christians living in the Middle East not to abandon their homes, in a speech to members of the Eastern Catholic Churches.
"Who, better than you, can sing a song of hope even amid the abyss of violence?" he told the packed Paul VI hall at the Vatican, noting that "from the Holy Land to Ukraine, from Lebanon to Syria, from the Middle East to Tigray and the Caucasus, how much violence do we see!".
He urged them to pray for peace, adding: "For my part, I will make every effort so that this peace may prevail.
"The Holy See is always ready to help bring enemies together, face to face, to talk to one another, so that peoples everywhere may once more find hope and recover the dignity they deserve, the dignity of peace.
"The peoples of our world desire peace, and to their leaders I appeal with all my heart: Let us meet, let us talk, let us negotiate!".
Leo took over as pontiff from Pope Francis, who died on April 21 aged 88.
He was speaking at a pre-arranged event for the 2025 Jubilee holy year dedicated to the 23 Eastern Catholic Churches, located across Eastern Europe, the Middle East, India, and parts of Africa.
In his appeal to end conflicts — a dominant theme in his addresses so far -- Leo thanked those "sowing seeds of peace".
"I thank God for those Christians -- Eastern and Latin alike -- who, above all in the Middle East, persevere and remain in their homelands, resisting the temptation to abandon them," he said.
"Christians must be given the opportunity, and not just in words, to remain in their native lands with all the rights needed for a secure existence. Please, let us strive for this!"
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Arabian Post
3 days ago
- Arabian Post
Assam Chief Minister's Arms Policy May Throw North-East Into Terrible Chaos
By Dr. Gyan Pathak The most vocal Hindutva face in the North-East India, the chief minister of Assam Himanta Biswa Sarma, having shown penchant for igniting communal fire in the past, now seems to have decided on playing with even more terrible fire of arms conflicts, if his new arms policy in the state is of any indication. The decision of the BJP-led Assam government under his leadership to put more arms into the hands of civilians would only accelerate insurgent and communal violence in the entire North-East, which has already been suffering from such menace for quite some time. Himanta Biswa Sarma is all for arming indigenous people in the vulnerable border areas near Bangladesh. He clarified on May 29, 2025, that Assam's new arms licence policy will not apply to areas bordering Arunachal Pradesh, Meghalaya, Mizoram and Nagaland, because these areas are not considered vulnerable in terms of national security. Two things emerged from his statement – First, border areas of Assam along Bangladesh are vulnerable; and secondly, the border areas along other North-Eastern states are not vulnerable in terms of national security, though these regions have been historically involved in border disputes and armed conflicts. No doubt, border areas along the international border with Bangladesh have been vulnerable, and his government seems to suggest it categorically. The question is who is responsible for that? Providing security to life and property of every citizen in the country is guaranteed by the Constitution of India, and the governments take the guarantee. People living in the border areas are vulnerable only because the Centre is failing in its responsibility in protecting the international border, and the government of Assam unable to protect the Indian citizens within its boundary. BJP government at the centre and in Assam have been always trying to shift their responsibilities of stopping infiltration from Bangladesh on to the opposition, repeatedly telling the country that the opposition political parties have been allowing Muslim infiltrators from Bangladesh, for their vote bank. What the double engine governments of BJP has been doing – in Assam since 2016, and at the Centre since 2014? Why the people living in the areas along the international border with Bangladesh? It is not their failure that people are still vulnerable there? Protecting the citizen is government's responsibility. If the governments with its powerful trained army and armed police force can't give protection, how can civilian protect themselves with just supply of arms? Civilians neither can protect themselves not their arms. We have recently seen it in Manipur, where arms were looted from armed forces by insurgent or militant groups. Chief Minister of Assam, obviously have not taken any lesson from that. That is why the cabinet note said that the policy aims to act as a deterrent to unlawful threats and improve the personal safety and confidence of the indigenous communities. It is a false perception of the government, since we have seen across the country that people with arms have been targeted by militant groups only to snatch arms. After supplying arms who will protect the civilians? Assam government has indirectly admitted by approving new arms policy that the government's security forces were unable to give protection to the civilians in the border areas. Sarma himself said, 'The indigenous people in these districts live in an atmosphere of insecurity due to recent developments in Bangladesh. They face the threat of attacks from the Bangladesh side and even from within their own villages.' The new arms policy would be reportedly implemented in a vast area of Assam in the districts of Dhubri, Nagaon, Morigaon, Barpeta, Goalpara, and South Salmara-Mankachar, where the Muslims of Bangladesh origin form the majority and indigenous population are in the minority. Sarma has said, 'The government will be lenient in providing arms licences to eligible people, who must be original habitants and belong to indigenous communities.' What does it mean? Arms would be supplied effectively to non-Muslims, indigenous people and original inhabitants that is to Hindus. Sarma has stressed that the policy is not aimed at militarizing civilians but to address a long-standing demand since 1985, but no government has dared to take this decision. Though the policy has been brought in the name of border areas, it is likely to be implemented across the state. Here is what Sarma said, 'The government will identify the vulnerable areas where we will grant arms licences to the indigenous people in a liberal manner. Areas like Hatigaon in Guwahati may also be marked as vulnerable area.' There is no doubt that these freely gotten arms may travel to all areas of Assam and also to other states in the North-East especially the bordering states of Arunachal Pradesh, Meghalaya, Mizoram and Nagaland. Inter-state border areas would run heightened risks of armed violence, because of border disputes and conflicts. The arms may also fall into the hands of militant groups and insurgents, and in the wrong hands. Putting arms in the hands of the civilians is thus highly risky which is nothing short of propagation of violence and armed conflicts within the state among various groups of people, and also in the entre North-East, which has already been suffering from ethnic, militant, or insurgent violence. India has a precedence of supplying arms to civilians in Chhattisgarh to counter Maoist threat, which led to lawlessness in 2000s. Supreme Court of India had to intervene and declare the policy illegal. Chief Minister of Assam perhaps not learned any lesson from that also. Then there are other issues – such as the heightened risks of communal violence and vigilantism of the armed civilians against others who are not armed. Assam and the North-East is already very sensitive region of the country, as far as communal, ethnic, militant, or insurgent violence are concerned, of which the region has a history. By arming the specific group of civilians through new arms policy purportedly for self-defence, BJP's double engine government is trying to abdicate its core responsibility of providing security to citizens, and encouraging people indirectly to take law in their own hands. Centre and the state must enhance its security presence and drop the policy of arming civilians. In absence of government's security, the idea of arming specific group of civilians is a most dangerous game. (IPA Service)
Gulf Today
26-05-2025
- Gulf Today
Trump has a new battle on his hands to win Nobel Prize
Michael Day, The Independent Ending a war in 24 hours is tricky — as self-proclaimed peacemaker Donald Trump is discovering. Even four months isn't a long time when the conflict you've offered to help resolve involves a maniacal head of a nuclear-armed, mafia state determined to take over a plucky democratic neighbour. Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky's refusal to wave a white flag presents a serious obstacle not only to Trump's peace plans, but more importantly to his hopes of a Nobel Prize — an award that the narcissist in the Oval Office desperately wants and thinks he deserves. For Trump, the global gong would be the ultimate recognition. It would make him only the fifth US president to ever win one. His nemesis, Barack Obama, had been in power for less than eight months when he was awarded his, in 2009; his acceptance speech came days after he had sent an additional 30,000 US troops into Afghanistan and launched drone attacks on Pakistan, all part of his expansion of the War on Terror. In Trump's bid to be the one to bring peace to Ukraine and Russia, he has a rival. There is now another US citizen of the world in the running. Step forward, Pope Leo XIV. There are already signs that Leo wants to use his new-found global influence in conflict resolution. This week, it emerged that the Pope has told Italian prime minister Giorgia Meloni of his desire for the Vatican to host the next round of peace talks between Russia and Ukraine. During his first speech, at his inauguration Mass, he called for peace in three war-torn regions: Gaza, Myanmar and Ukraine, which "awaits negotiations for a fair and lasting peace" — not a short-lived, shabby ceasefire. The first North American pontiff has at least nationality in common with the US president. But their CVs reveal somewhat different life choices. Leo has spent decades as an Augustinian priest, helping people; Trump, less so. Pope Francis had been nominated for this year's peace prize before his death last month — but the award is never given posthumously. Might the Nobel Committee be persuaded to offer it to the position of Pope, or the institution of the Papacy as a whole, rather than the man himself? It is quite possible the well of credit built up by his predecessor may aid the Vatican's chances of being recognised by the committee. After helping revive relations between the US and Cuba, Francis worked hard to build dialogue between Iran and the West, and in 2015 oversaw the Holy See's historic first treaty with Palestine, which recognised it as a state. Leo's willingness to use his authority as the world's most powerful religious leader to push for a meaningful peace in Ukraine appears in stark contrast to Trump's cynicism. This week, the US president ignored Europe's push for new sanctions on Moscow in his eagerness to win new business deals with Putin and weaken China's hold on the Kremlin. Perhaps Trump thinks the election of a US Pope can work in his favour; maybe some of that Papal peace stuff might rub off on him? He wasted no time in parading Leo's Maga-supporting brother, Louis Prevost, in the Oval Office, just a day after the vice president met the new pontiff in Rome. But it will take more than staged Oval Office meetings or absurd declarations to bridge the gulf between the Trump administration and the Vatican on a range of issues, from appeasement of Putin and indifference to Israel's onslaught against Gazan civilians, to migrants' rights. The piquant details are not going to enamour the Nobel Peace Prize jury. If, in the unlikely event, the race for the Prize came down to a choice between the leader of a political cult and head of a religious movement, there would be only one winner. And if Leo got the award, his satisfaction would come not from the recognition, but the peace he'd helped bring about.
Middle East Eye
21-05-2025
- Middle East Eye
Pope Leo XIV urges Israel to permit humanitarian aid into Gaza
Pope Leo XIV appealed on Wednesday for Israel to open Gaza's borders to humanitarian aid, describing the situation in the Palestinian territory as 'deeply worrying and heartbreaking.' During his weekly general audience at St Peter's Square, the pope emphasised the urgent need to stop hostilities, warning that the gravest suffering falls on children, the elderly and the sick. 'I renew my plea … to allow for the entry of fair humanitarian help and to bring to an end the hostilities,' he said, calling for an immediate halt to the violence that continues to devastate the enclave. Pope Leo XIV blesses the crowd at the end of his first weekly general audience at St Peter's Square in The Vatican on 21 May 2025 (AFP)
